Vox Day declares Nazism “semiotically useful,” specifies which kind of Jew is ok to him

Consider the case of everyone’s favorite racist dickhead fantasy author, Theodore “Vox Day” Beale. Ever since he discovered, two years ago, that his DNA contained enough Native American blood “to qualify for membership in most Indian tribes,” Beale has been using these DNA results to do a sort of end-run around accusations of racism.

How can he be a racist, much less a white supremacist, if he’s technically a “Person of Color,” specifically “a real Indian, complete with tribe, reservation, casino, and language” (that he of course does not speak). It’s a “gotcha” he loves to pull out every time someone points to any of the incredibly racist things he’s said over the years.

Now this little rhetorical gambit of his is starting to backfire. Turns out Beale’s identification of himself as a “Native American” isn’t exactly endearing him to the hardcore white supremacists of the Alt Right.

And so Beale, who very much wants to be not only a member but a big name in the Alt-Right club, has decided to invent a whole new category of Alt Right for people like him. Or perhaps just him.

In a blog post today, Beale divides the Alt Right into three groups: The Alt-White, the Alt-Lite, and the Alt-West. The Alt-White consists of the unrepentantly white supremacist Daily Stormer crowd. The Alt-Lite is made up of Pepe-posting anime Nazis who, in his mind, don’t really count as serious Alt-Rightists at all.

And then there is the Alt-West, which consists, as far as I can tell, of no one but Beale himself.

Beale tries to explain the details of this particular sorting system, but his efforts really only serve to muddy things further.

Alt-White is for whites only. Alt-West is pan-racial and pan-national, which should not be confused with being multicultural or equalitarian or pro-diversity in the egalitarian sense.

Beale is the only “pan-racialist” I’ve ever run across who not only rails against white women dating black men, but who actually went so far as to mock a “coal burning” white woman who was recently murdered by her black boyfriend. Beale’s take? “Burn de coal, pay de toll.”

Alt-White is primarily concerned with white nationalism, and secondarily concerned with European nationalisms. … While the Alt-West supports white nationalism, that is not its sole concern, as it supports all nationalism, European or otherwise.

Distinction without a difference.

Alt-White is neutral to hostile on Christianity. Alt-West is strongly pro-Christian, as it believes Christianity to be one of the three pillars of Western Civilization aka the historical Christendom.

But don’t worry, aspiring Alt-Westerners! You don’t actually have to do more than pay a vague lip-service to the idea of Christianity!

Pro-Christian includes, but does not require, actually being a Christian.

And then comes what the Nazi types like to call the Jewish Question.

Alt-White is hostile to very hostile to all Jews everywhere. Alt-West is friendly to Israeli Jews while hostile to globalist Jews and anti-nationalist Jews.

So Beale is fine with Jews just so long as they don’t live in his neighborhood. Or his country. Or indeed any country other than Israel.

But perhaps the most revealing bit is Beale’s take on literal Hitler and the literal Nazis.

Alt-White has a romantic view of National Socialism. Alt-West regards it as a suicidally stupid but semiotically useful form of German nationalism.

Er, what?

So Beale’s main criticism of the Nazis is that … they were kind of stupid for invading Russia and dooming themselves to defeat? But, hey, they had the coolest logo?

Aside from these little differences, Beale assures any Alt-Whities reading his post that

Alt-White and Alt-West are largely in accord. … [W]ith the possible exception of Christianity in the long term, there is very little reason for conflict between Alt-White and Alt-West … .

Also, white people are totally awesome!

There are much bigger battles ahead than settling the question of whether Christianity is a necessary component of Western Civilization or not. Because we know the white race is absolutely a necessary component of it, and that is why, whether one is inclined towards the Alt-White or the Alt-West, every member of the Alt-Right who values both whites and the West has immediate and mid-range objectives remain exactly the same.

Comments

Whenever I hear (or more likely see, since it’s the Internet) someone rant about The International Jew, I like to pretend they’re talking about a single man who is imbued with supervillain-like powers that he uses exclusively to be a nuisance to that person, doing things like signing their name on chain letters, tapping on their windows at random times of day, and crank calling them.

Or maybe it’s the sort of natural hypocricy we all tend to have when other people are speaking negatively about something we’re close to

Have you seen the David Packman Show? ‘Lefty’ news show on YouTube run by David and Louis. Both Jewish (Argentina and Iran, respectively). The conflict comes up on occasion, and they have what seems to me like a reasonable take how a peace settlement would look. It seems reasonable to me from 6000mi away, so who knows?

Not the point. If you’re ever feeling yourself gluttonous for punishment, read the comment sections on those vids. I have literally no stake in the conflict, and I go into a rage everytime. All the greatest hits. Something something zionists, yadda yadda international, blah blah bronze age, wank wank ‘religion of peace’ (always passive aggressively sarcastic). It’ll make ya despise humanity, it will

All of which would be nonsense (and mostly racist) even if Dave was advocating bombing Gaza to smithereens or something. At least I’d understand to vitriol. Nope:
Pakman: ‘Hamas is bad, mkay’
DownwiththeProtocols1996: ‘[slur][slur][slur]’

It’s not hypocrisy, it’s experience. A foreigner says some shit about my country, I can brush it off. I don’t like it, and my inherent nationalism takes a hit, but I’ll be fine. Besides, it’s usually true. A foreigner says some shit about your country, even when it’s nominally true, 9 times outta 10, they got some ethnoreligious hangup. ‘You’re Israeli (read: Zahyunist Bankstuh), better not have the wrong opinions. Be one of the good ones.’ Ugh…

Re apartheid:
Talking to white South Africans of my parents’ generation, what one hears most often is wistfulness. They once lived in a magical country in which everything was set up in order to belong to people like them. If they looked under the surface then what they saw was deeply ugly, but many intentionally chose not to for that very reason. Many, even lefties like my parents, will occasionally wax nostalgic about it. Yes, it was hideous, but they didn’t see the hideousness in their daily lives if they didn’t look for it: what they saw was a country where people like them got to vote for leaders like them who spoke about policies that concerned people like them, in their own language. When people on television made jokes then they could relate to them, and when religious leaders said bigoted things then at least it was a bigotry they were familiar with. That’s something which is hard to hate even if you know that it exists upon immoral foundations.

It’s easy to deal with that conflict by hating its victims, and many white South Africans did that. It’s also easy to deal with it by saying “we know we should reform it, but then it wouldn’t be our country any more, so we can’t bear to.” Many white South Africans did that too.

I have a great deal of fellow feeling with modern-day Israelis. No matter how much one knows about the ugliness that underlies everything, what one sees on a daily basis is a comfortable country. Jewish people elect a Jewish government which governs for its Jewish citizens in Hebrew. The jokes on television are about things they can relate to, and when religious leaders say something bigoted then at least it’s a bigotry that they can relate to. If you’re an outsider then it’s very easy to say “we need to give Palestinians the right to return,” and very easy to scoff at the response “then it wouldn’t be our country any more”; but that is a genuine and heartfelt response and should not be downplayed.

Similarly, when I hear neoconfederates in the United States, or isolationists in Australia or UKIP members in the United Kingdom, I can hear the same plaintive cry. I empathise with it, but I oppose it as I must.

We destroyed apartheid in South Africa, and it was the right thing to do. Nowadays the government is black, voted in by a mostly black electorate, and it governs on behalf of a mostly black nation. Afrikaans language music and television is now pretty niche, and when people worry about what the religious community will think, they’re no longer thinking of the Dutch Reformed Church. In a sense, we lost our country. In another sense, it was never ours to begin with. In a broader sense it is still ours and always has been, but the “us” has broadened. In the broadest sense, we didn’t lose our country but won it, and in doing so won ourselves too.

It hurts to let go of privilege. I will not diminish that. It is very painful to admit that we were wrong all along, and that the fairytale land of our childhoods must recede into mist as all fairytales do. But it is important.

Well expressed, EJ. Just out of curiosity, would your parents have read the Cape Times by any chance, or might they have crossed paths with one of its editors (the late B. Streek)? My (also late) dad (exiled in absentia for anti-Apartheid activities) gave me the impression that it could be a small world sometimes. (apologies if I’ve asked this before, my memory is pretty crap)

@Chaos-Engineer Yeah, the Alt-Right is basically a mix of more secular paleoconservatives and libertarians who are less ideologically pure on libertarian ideals (basically the ones who are much more into actual bigotry than principled opposition to anti-discrimination laws). Many libertarians are willing to cooperate with leftists on issues like war, government surveillance, police brutality, abortion and gay rights, and drug policy. But alt-right libertarians tend to completely oppose any cooperation with the left.

Since the end of World War II, Nazis have been divided on Islam and Muslims. Many moderated their views so they could pass for conservatives. Their opposition to Israel was less driven by wanting to help the Palestinians and more by anti-Semitism. But Israel has adopted racist and right-wing nationalist policies, so it doesn’t fit in as well with the image of “the Jews” as a subversive conspiratorial left-wing force. Hence, the Nazis aren’t so troubled that Trump supports Netanyahu as long as he’s opposed to the liberal and leftist Jewish establishment in the U.S.

EJ, thank you so much for sharing this. It’s given me so much to think and feel about privilege.

It reminds me a lot of the history of Bolivia, which for 450 years had a de facto apartheid on aboriginal people.

This cultural siege was broken after the Cochabamba Water War in 2000, from which indigenous leaders united and eventually Evo Morales, from the Aymara people, emerged as leader, then presidential candidate, then President.

From that time on, the vast majority of representatives has been indigenous people, as well as most of the public policies enforced.

Of course this is far from perfect, and powerful economic groups are waiting for the right moment to strike against this new regime -they even attempted a coup d’Etat that was stopped short of a civil massacre.

I definitely can see how the minority of white progressive people in Bolivia might feel similarly to South Africans, of caourse taking into account all the cultural and historical differences between both countries and both continents.

(I can’t really use Argentina as an example here because our segregation and politics scenario is way different and includes certain factors like a larger presence of white people, Peronism, etc, which make it all more complex).

(Those were both very respectable, very pro-establishment Afrikaans-language newspapers. Die Beeld was a little more liberal inasmuch as that’s a useful term – Afrikaans culture can be stiflingly close, and was even more so at the time.)

The Cape Times is an English-language newspaper, and at the time this was an important difference, especially in media. That said, my father’s parents were both journalists by trade, so I’m sure they would have known Streek and read his newspaper.

EJ – Again, I might just be getting overly defensive here, but the Israel situation is a bit more complicated, especially when you’re looking at Israel itself (as I said, the occupied territories are a different story). Because it is not an all-Jewish nation. There are hardcore racists who would like it to be, and there is a lot of systemic racism, and non-systemic “regular” racism, but Arab-Israelis (or Palestinian-Israelis, or ’48 Palestinians, etc., depending on whom you ask) are equal citizens, at least in theory (see “systemic racism”, above). They vote in the Israeli elections (in varying percentages, because many don’t really believe in tne system, for obvious reasons), they get elected to parliament, they study in Israeli universities (although they need good Hebrew/English for that) and work with Israeli coworkers (although racism means it might be harder for them to get a job), and while there are predominantly Arab neighbourhoods/villages/towns, they are not actually segregated, and many Arabs live side by side with Jews (although here too, racism and discrimination abound). Arabic is on official documents and signs (well, most of the time). Muslim and Druze holidays are on official calendars (although unlike the Jewish holidays they aren’t default days-off).

As is clear from my many parentheses, things are far – so very, painfully far – from being perfect, or even acceptable. And yet, I don’t think “apartheid” is the right term for it.
Perhaps I have it wrong, either on SA or on Israel, though. But I do think it’s a more complex issue.

Still, when it comes to the OT, yeah, you’re pretty spot-on. It’s easy to turn a blind eye to tne situation there, even when it’s right around the corner, and concentrate on your life here being okay. And usually the very people who think Israel should annex the area are at the same time afraid of giving the Palestinians there the civil rights that would come with that, because they’re afraid of losing their privilege as the (current) majority.
Well, and they’re afraid of terrorists, too. What can ya do.

If population trends continue, white people will be a minority in the United States within a few decades. The economic crisis has already done a lot to accelerate the inevitable (barring explicitly racist government policies) demise of the white middle-class. People attach less and less importance to traditional middle-class culture. There’s a lot of sincere “this is our country” feeling among Trump supporters.

@Penny The terrorism is the primary reason why the situation with the OT is “complicated.” At this point, the only just workable solution seems to be for Israel to annex the territories and give everyone full voting rights.

That ‘Identititarian Christianity’ thing makes no logical sense, but it seems to explain the strategies of the breeding obsessed fundies like the Quiverfull cult. They are ‘Dominionists’ and therefore believe in trying to outbreed their enemies by breeding as many white, Christian, Repubican voting offspring as you are humanly capable of. (Of course, at great risk to the mother or ‘broodmare’)
Isn’t this completely at odds with the ‘true’ form of Christianity, where people convert and ‘join the flock’? They seem to see being a white, right wing American as more important to Christianity than a genuine faith or any form of spirituality. It makes me wonder if they even worship the Jesus of the Bible, or a bogeyman they made up to fit with their abhorrent, intolerant, misogynistic worldview.

Yeah, plurality. Minority in the sense that white people won’t be the majority anymore.

A binational one-state solution might be the only feasible solution at this point, at least with Israel and the West Bank. Of course, you can’t just unilaterally annex a territory and give people voting rights and expect stuff to work out. The political problems related to a binational solution will probably need to be addressed anyway.

@Luxbelitx:
Thank you for sharing that. It’s always deeply interesting to hear about colonialism and its long-term effects in different countries.

South America is a cool place and I’m conscious that I don’t know enough about it.

@Penny Psmith:
The term “apartheid” is an awkward one; I use it here to indicate a two-tier system of civil rights, rather than a strict separation of ethnicities, because the latter didn’t really exist in South Africa either. Even the “white” and “Indian” areas were mostly populated by black people. While the word literally means “separation” in Afrikaans, that was largely for propaganda reasons.

Still, I’m glad it’s merely racist where you are, and I say that sincerely. You’re a nice person, and while it’s easy to talk about privilege and demand that people work against it, it’s much harder to do it.

(We had terrorism too: Mandela’s organisation, the ANC, carried out campaigns of supermarket bombings and the targeted murders of black people who cooperated with the authorities. Remember that those were the good guys. Some of the other liberation organisations were even more brutal, and the police were the worst of all. I’m glad that the terrorists won, even if they were nominally opposed to “my” people.)

Yeah, Vox encouraging people to harass a writer until the writer retracts an article stating that Vox encourages people to engage in harassment.

The bewildering thing is that the harassers commenting genuinely don’t seem to be able to see the irony. They honestly believe that the article is wrong whilst simultaneously engaging in the behaviour referred to. The human mind is an amazing thing.

I didn’t know what on Earth Vox Day could mean by “semiotically useful,” so I looked it up, as you do. Wiktionary says that semiotic has a dated definition meaning “of or relating to the signs or symptoms of diseases,” which I think is fitting.

Heh.

I suspect what he means is “they were (militarily) stupid but the term ‘Nazi’ and the icons associated with them help us racist turdgoblins recognize each other online.”

I suppose the main difference between the nationalism of the Israelis (Zionism) and the White/Christian/European based nationalisms of Apartheid SA, Confederates, UKIPpers and so on is that nobody has made an actual serious attempt to wipe the “white race” off the face of the earth yet (however much some idiots bang on about “white genocide”).

So I don’t think that any lasting peaceful solution for Israel/Palestine is going to be possible without stamping out antisemitism in our own societies. Only when Jews can feel safe outside Israel will there be any chance of compromising on the idea of a “Jewish State” and allowing Arabs full rights within the Israel/Palestine area. One thing I would like to see is generous resettlement grants offered to any Israeli Jews who want to come to European countries to restore those communities decimated by the Holocaust and subsequent exodus.

They won’t compromise on the Jewish State, because to these people, the ‘identitarian Christians’ and other fundies/evangelicals it is instrumental in the war to end all wars AKA Armageddon. This is something which they actually WANT to happen. The Christian lobbyists have done their damndest to position themselves and their agents into office so they can directly effect foreign policy, in favour of outcomes which they can lever into their distorted interpretation of scripture. This is also why they are so interested in rebuilding the Temple of Solomon on the site of the Dome of the Rock mosque, as this would trigger the war which would lead to the apocalypse and the Rapture, a time when the elect Christians will be spirited away to rule alongside Christ in heaven, whilst the Jews inherit the ‘New Earth’.
That is of course a very polemicised reading of scripture, and not anything based on what the Bible actually says. So if you wonder why they don’t want to do anything to restore peace in the middle east, it’s because peace is the last thing they want. So much for Jesus being the ‘Prince of Peace’ 🙁

Operation Exodus, if you want to google it, actually offer Jewish families from Europe resettlement grants to move *to* Israel. I don’t see them doing this the other way around.

And thanks for your perspective. I know very little about the apartheid in SA (although my parental grandfather was originally South African, he died when my dad was a toddler and there was never much of a connection to the family there) – and moreover, I think it’s important to note similarities even when they aren’t 1:1, so we can learn, and consider things.

Regarding people’s ideas on Israel/Palestine solutions, personally I can’t see how we could have something that isn’t a two-state solution. Mostly because the Palestinians want their own self-governed state, so telling them, essentially, “just give it up and join into Israel” seems problematic. And judging from what I see of both nations, even if a binational state could be ideal in theory, in practice it looks like something that will involve years, if not generations, of ugly power struggles, and worse.
A Palestinian state will require a whole lot of support before it can actually stand on its own two legs, and there are a whole lot of issues that will be very difficult to solve (borders, water, Right of Return etc.), and there will also be a whole lot of pushback from radicals on both sides, but even with all that, it seems to me to be the only solution that makes sense; again, both sides are rather invested in the idea of a national state.

I can’t see how we could have something that isn’t a two-state solution.

I have seen some serious discussion around a possible ‘three state’ solution. That is to say Gaza and WB as separate entities (possibly as autonomous annexes to Egypt and Jordan for infrastructure reasons).

It’s generally been as a fall-back contigency if the 2 state solution doesn’t work out. Mitigates against the possibility of a civil war over control of the new state and gets round the ‘contiguity’ problem (which brings up all sorts of ‘Berlin corridor’ type issues).

I agree with the point Simon made above. I, as a Jew, have no reason to trust that anybody is going to just leave us the hell alone and let us live our lives, not in Europe, not in the Middle East, not anywhere. The only place we have that we can actually be safe is Israel, and to deny us a place of our own after 1500 years of constant slaughter and persecution is simply unacceptable. We can talk about a Palestinian right of return when Hamas puts down their weapons and starts using that aid money to build a functioning state, rather than building tunnels and weapons to continue a pointless war with.

We Hunted the Mammoth tracks and mocks the white male rage underlying the rise of Trump and Trumpism. This blog is NOT a safe space; given the subject matter -- misogyny and hate -- there's really no way it could be.